Bernie blames Mercedes and Ferrari.

[babararacucudada]

http://planetf1.com/news/ecclestone-fer ... b-comments

It's not really their fault but Jean Todt and Bernie's, because they were the ones who brought in the hybrid engines in the way they did.

The teams are only refusing to help their competitors.

I'm all for fixing the mistake as soon as possible, but it's Jean and Bernie's mistake.

[pokerman]

http://planetf1.com/news/ecclestone-fer ... b-comments

It's not really their fault but Jean Todt and Bernie's, because they were the ones who brought in the hybrid engines in the way they did.

The teams are only refusing to help their competitors.

I'm all for fixing the mistake as soon as possible, but it's Jean and Bernie's mistake.

Apart from the 2.4L V8 frozen engines, when in the sands of time was it decreed that engines had to be equal?

How can you have engine development, an engine war, and then decree they have to be equal in performance?

[Balibari]

You're making the mistake of assuming Bernie is being serious. If you assume he's an avant garde outsider performance artist challenging our conceptions of reality and order, everything he says and does makes perfect sense.

[F1 MERCENARY]

http://planetf1.com/news/ecclestone-fer ... b-comments

It's not really their fault but Jean Todt and Bernie's, because they were the ones who brought in the hybrid engines in the way they did.

The teams are only refusing to help their competitors.

I'm all for fixing the mistake as soon as possible, but it's Jean and Bernie's mistake.

Apart from the 2.4L V8 frozen engines, when in the sands of time was it decreed that engines had to be equal?

How can you have engine development, an engine war, and then decree they have to be equal in performance?

Precisely. At one point we had a variety of engines of different configurations and displacements so for Bernie to call for equality is preposterous. The name of the game is outdo the competitions and that goes for every part/component of the cars.

Chassis
Brakes
Cooling
Drivetrain

The equality is in the tires allowed so that all have the same chance of doing their best given the rubber, though tires themselves still need improvement.

[ALESI]

http://planetf1.com/news/ecclestone-fer ... b-comments

It's not really their fault but Jean Todt and Bernie's, because they were the ones who brought in the hybrid engines in the way they did.

The teams are only refusing to help their competitors.

I'm all for fixing the mistake as soon as possible, but it's Jean and Bernie's mistake.

The problem with that is that there are only 4 manufacturers to go round. If it's okay then the others might as well go home or club together and get an independent engine - oh no wait...

[Alienturnedhuman]

Having the engines equal is just plain nuts, and - as previously pointed out - it's almost certain Bernie knows this as well; he's just making the noises he needs to make to further his own agenda.

The only component that makes sense being equalised is the tyres - and that's because its the single biggest differentiator. Look at Ferrari's dominance when they were the only big team on Bridgestones, and then how they went from their best ever season (2004) to one of their worst (2005) following a change in tyre regulations. Also see the difference in performance of over a second a lap between some Pirelli tyre compounds. A Merc engine does not have that advantage over the Ferrari engine, or probably even over the Honda.

if the engines were equalised - along with the tyres - the discussion moves to the next biggest performance differentiator: aero. Then we have calls for spec front wings, or a standard floor. Different teams have different strengths. The 2009-2013 era was weighted in favour of aero, because the engines were almost identical in power. The new regs changed the weighting in favour of engines, however it'snot as big as people like to claim as Ferrari and Red Bull have generally been the number 2 and number 3 teams since the start of 2014; if engines were over dominant then Williams and Force India should be making more of an impression on Red Bull and Ferrari than they have been. They've only tended to compete against them at power circuits.

The fact is, Mercedes has the best overall package, between engine, aero and tyre management etc... thanks to a shift away from aero in the power balance. But aero is still very important.

Red Bull like to suggest they are the best F1 team hampered by a weak engine. This is false. They are the best F1 team at aero. There is no definition that says that the strength of an F1 team is measured by who has the best aerodynamics. For the current formula, Mercedes is the best F1 team as they nailed the formula. Just as Red Bull was when the focus was more on aero and they got it just right.

[moby]

The best way to have "equal" engines is not to change the rules every year. We may have 5 year of one being superior, but we are well on the way to that anyway.
There is an article on James Allen where Ferrari say it was Red Bulls attitude that they did not like, so why blame the engine makers? most pubs or shops have signs saying to the meaning of if we dont want to sell you anything, we won't, wht should engine makers cut their own throat?
To be fair to Bernie, he has said from the start he did not want these engines.

[pokerman]

The best way to have "equal" engines is not to change the rules every year. We may have 5 year of one being superior, but we are well on the way to that anyway.
There is an article on James Allen where Ferrari say it was Red Bulls attitude that they did not like, so why blame the engine makers? most pubs or shops have signs saying to the meaning of if we dont want to sell you anything, we won't, wht should engine makers cut their own throat?
To be fair to Bernie, he has said from the start he did not want these engines.

Within about 3 or 4 races of the 2014 season Red Bull asked for the engines to be equalised, it's like for them F1 only started the minute they bought their F1 team, but then again maybe they are right as apparently they are the second most historic team in F1.

[Chunky]

You're making the mistake of assuming Bernie is being serious. If you assume he's an avant garde outsider performance artist challenging our conceptions of reality and order, everything he says and does makes perfect sense.

My hovercraft is full of eels.

.

[Migen]

The best way to have "equal" engines is not to change the rules every year. We may have 5 year of one being superior, but we are well on the way to that anyway.
There is an article on James Allen where Ferrari say it was Red Bulls attitude that they did not like, so why blame the engine makers? most pubs or shops have signs saying to the meaning of if we dont want to sell you anything, we won't, wht should engine makers cut their own throat?
To be fair to Bernie, he has said from the start he did not want these engines.

Within about 3 or 4 races of the 2014 season Red Bull asked for the engines to be equalised, it's like for them F1 only started the minute they bought their F1 team, but then again maybe they are right as apparently they are the second most historic team in F1.

The horrendous reliability of the Renault engine especially in pre-season testing, which affected the development of Red Bull's own aero too, considering the huge amount of money Red Bull were putting into it, made Red Bull reaction very understandable IMO.

How would Mercedes react if their fuel supplier got it wrong (if fuel composition wasnt as restricted as it is now), making Mercedes go 1 second slower than the leaders, even though they know they have the best engine/chassis combo!?
Wouldnt they be livid at their fuel supplier?
Would you rule out Mercedes asking for fuel equalization? You can bet your "insert priceless possession" that they would ask for it.. again, very understandable.

[pokerman]

The best way to have "equal" engines is not to change the rules every year. We may have 5 year of one being superior, but we are well on the way to that anyway.
There is an article on James Allen where Ferrari say it was Red Bulls attitude that they did not like, so why blame the engine makers? most pubs or shops have signs saying to the meaning of if we dont want to sell you anything, we won't, wht should engine makers cut their own throat?
To be fair to Bernie, he has said from the start he did not want these engines.

Within about 3 or 4 races of the 2014 season Red Bull asked for the engines to be equalised, it's like for them F1 only started the minute they bought their F1 team, but then again maybe they are right as apparently they are the second most historic team in F1.

The horrendous reliability of the Renault engine especially in pre-season testing, which affected the development of Red Bull's own aero too, considering the huge amount of money Red Bull were putting into it, made Red Bull reaction very understandable IMO.

How would Mercedes react if their fuel supplier got it wrong (if fuel composition wasnt as restricted as it is now), making Mercedes go 1 second slower than the leaders, even though they know they have the best engine/chassis combo!?
Wouldnt they be livid at their fuel supplier?
Would you rule out Mercedes asking for fuel equalization? You can bet your "insert priceless possession" that they would ask for it.. again, very understandable.

I remember when McLaren signed with Peugeot and the engines were always blowing up, they didn't complain or ask for any kind of parity.

We seem to be in an era of F1 were many people think that engines should play no part in who wins or loses, basically they should be a spec item, one fuel supplier does a better job so let's make that spec as well.

Of course we wouldn't want to be equalising the amount of money that the teams themselves spend on F1 and making it a more level playing field for every team, that just wouldn't be F1.

[Randine]

Eventually the engines will converge to be almost equal as they get closer to getting the maximum from a 1.6 litre engine.

So doesn't equalisation just get to that point quicker?
If they want to cut the cost in F1, I would be up for them to have more standard parts apart from tyres.
e.g. fuel, brakes, tyres
Then maybe equalisation of the engines to have a maximum power output of say 1000hp or whatever Merc is at now.

I am sure all would agree here they want to see closer racing, but from the comments, most here are strongly against engine equalisation.

The FIA have already set a precedent when they allowed Renault to catch up to the others (engine manufacturers) at the end of the season in 2008...

[Migen]

The best way to have "equal" engines is not to change the rules every year. We may have 5 year of one being superior, but we are well on the way to that anyway.
There is an article on James Allen where Ferrari say it was Red Bulls attitude that they did not like, so why blame the engine makers? most pubs or shops have signs saying to the meaning of if we dont want to sell you anything, we won't, wht should engine makers cut their own throat?
To be fair to Bernie, he has said from the start he did not want these engines.

Within about 3 or 4 races of the 2014 season Red Bull asked for the engines to be equalised, it's like for them F1 only started the minute they bought their F1 team, but then again maybe they are right as apparently they are the second most historic team in F1.

The horrendous reliability of the Renault engine especially in pre-season testing, which affected the development of Red Bull's own aero too, considering the huge amount of money Red Bull were putting into it, made Red Bull reaction very understandable IMO.

How would Mercedes react if their fuel supplier got it wrong (if fuel composition wasnt as restricted as it is now), making Mercedes go 1 second slower than the leaders, even though they know they have the best engine/chassis combo!?
Wouldnt they be livid at their fuel supplier?
Would you rule out Mercedes asking for fuel equalization? You can bet your "insert priceless possession" that they would ask for it.. again, very understandable.

I remember when McLaren signed with Peugeot and the engines were always blowing up, they didn't complain or ask for any kind of parity.

We seem to be in an era of F1 were many people think that engines should play no part in who wins or loses, basically they should be a spec item, one fuel supplier does a better job so let's make that spec as well.

Of course we wouldn't want to be equalising the amount of money that the teams themselves spend on F1 and making it a more level playing field for every team, that just wouldn't be F1.

You got that one wrong I believe.
Mclaren had initially signed a 4 year deal with Peugeot and AFAIK the deal was broken even before the 1st season ended, with Mclaren negotiating a deal with Mercedes for the very next season... this tells you everything you need to know.
Of course, you coulnt hear as much complains blown up in public back then, although I remember some media picking up on that... world wide web didnt yet exist.

[stevey]

id rather they equalised on aero and forced the cars rears to have a positive impact on the car following. closer racing and real over taking, simples.

[pokerman]

Eventually the engines will converge to be almost equal as they get closer to getting the maximum from a 1.6 litre engine.

So doesn't equalisation just get to that point quicker?
If they want to cut the cost in F1, I would be up for them to have more standard parts apart from tyres.
e.g. fuel, brakes, tyres
Then maybe equalisation of the engines to have a maximum power output of say 1000hp or whatever Merc is at now.

I am sure all would agree here they want to see closer racing, but from the comments, most here are strongly against engine equalisation.

The FIA have already set a precedent when they allowed Renault to catch up to the others (engine manufacturers) at the end of the season in 2008...

No they didn't set a precedent because equalisation was basically written into the rules, again the frozen V8's that we had for a brief time are seen as a template for F1.

If close racing is the most important thing and equalisation is the way to do it then equalise the racing budgets as well, why just go half hog?

[pokerman]

The best way to have "equal" engines is not to change the rules every year. We may have 5 year of one being superior, but we are well on the way to that anyway.
There is an article on James Allen where Ferrari say it was Red Bulls attitude that they did not like, so why blame the engine makers? most pubs or shops have signs saying to the meaning of if we dont want to sell you anything, we won't, wht should engine makers cut their own throat?
To be fair to Bernie, he has said from the start he did not want these engines.

Within about 3 or 4 races of the 2014 season Red Bull asked for the engines to be equalised, it's like for them F1 only started the minute they bought their F1 team, but then again maybe they are right as apparently they are the second most historic team in F1.

The horrendous reliability of the Renault engine especially in pre-season testing, which affected the development of Red Bull's own aero too, considering the huge amount of money Red Bull were putting into it, made Red Bull reaction very understandable IMO.

How would Mercedes react if their fuel supplier got it wrong (if fuel composition wasnt as restricted as it is now), making Mercedes go 1 second slower than the leaders, even though they know they have the best engine/chassis combo!?
Wouldnt they be livid at their fuel supplier?
Would you rule out Mercedes asking for fuel equalization? You can bet your "insert priceless possession" that they would ask for it.. again, very understandable.

I remember when McLaren signed with Peugeot and the engines were always blowing up, they didn't complain or ask for any kind of parity.

We seem to be in an era of F1 were many people think that engines should play no part in who wins or loses, basically they should be a spec item, one fuel supplier does a better job so let's make that spec as well.

Of course we wouldn't want to be equalising the amount of money that the teams themselves spend on F1 and making it a more level playing field for every team, that just wouldn't be F1.

You got that one wrong I believe.
Mclaren had initially signed a 4 year deal with Peugeot and AFAIK the deal was broken even before the 1st season ended, with Mclaren negotiating a deal with Mercedes for the very next season... this tells you everything you need to know.
Of course, you coulnt hear as much complains blown up in public back then, although I remember some media picking up on that... world wide web didnt yet exist.

Did McLaren rubbish Peugoet everytime they could, are they rubbishing Honda now, are McLaren asking for the equalisation of the Hybrid engines?

[Migen]

Within about 3 or 4 races of the 2014 season Red Bull asked for the engines to be equalised, it's like for them F1 only started the minute they bought their F1 team, but then again maybe they are right as apparently they are the second most historic team in F1.

The horrendous reliability of the Renault engine especially in pre-season testing, which affected the development of Red Bull's own aero too, considering the huge amount of money Red Bull were putting into it, made Red Bull reaction very understandable IMO.

How would Mercedes react if their fuel supplier got it wrong (if fuel composition wasnt as restricted as it is now), making Mercedes go 1 second slower than the leaders, even though they know they have the best engine/chassis combo!?
Wouldnt they be livid at their fuel supplier?
Would you rule out Mercedes asking for fuel equalization? You can bet your "insert priceless possession" that they would ask for it.. again, very understandable.

I remember when McLaren signed with Peugeot and the engines were always blowing up, they didn't complain or ask for any kind of parity.

We seem to be in an era of F1 were many people think that engines should play no part in who wins or loses, basically they should be a spec item, one fuel supplier does a better job so let's make that spec as well.

Of course we wouldn't want to be equalising the amount of money that the teams themselves spend on F1 and making it a more level playing field for every team, that just wouldn't be F1.

You got that one wrong I believe.
Mclaren had initially signed a 4 year deal with Peugeot and AFAIK the deal was broken even before the 1st season ended, with Mclaren negotiating a deal with Mercedes for the very next season... this tells you everything you need to know.
Of course, you coulnt hear as much complains blown up in public back then, although I remember some media picking up on that... world wide web didnt yet exist.

Did McLaren rubbish Peugoet everytime they could, are they rubbishing Honda now, are McLaren asking for the equalisation of the Hybrid engines?

Maybe they did, maybe they didnt, we just wouldnt hear much about it back in those years anyways...at the end, it important to note that Mclaren didnt even need to make much noise in first place because they were bailed out of a 4 year deal at the 1st opportunity for a worthier engine maker, for the very next season.
If Red Bull had a similar opportunity, quite likely we would have never heard any calls for engine equalization from them. But the fact is that Red Bull simply did not have such luxury.They have had to make due with Renault for 3 seasons... there was no Mercedes, no Audi, no other car manufacturer willing to venture into F1 or provide them a competitive engine.

The later case of Mclaren/Honda, has seen Mclaren being far more patient than what they did with Peugeot, and far more patient than Red Bull towards Renault. But still there are some important differences in between Mclaren/Honda and Red Bull/Renauls to take into account.
Unlike Red Bull, who's engine makers Renault were on the back of a successful patch, already in F1 and had the same time frame and opportunity to prepare and come up with a decent engine comparable with the competition, Mclaren should have taken into account (and maybe they did so) that with Honda joining the party so late (being persuaded by Mclaren themselves in first place), there was always a great risk of running into troubles.

[POBRatings]

http://planetf1.com/news/ecclestone-fer ... b-comments

It's not really their fault but Jean Todt and Bernie's, because they were the ones who brought in the hybrid engines in the way they did.

The teams are only refusing to help their competitors.

I'm all for fixing the mistake as soon as possible, but it's Jean and Bernie's mistake.

Apart from the 2.4L V8 frozen engines, when in the sands of time was it decreed that engines had to be equal?

How can you have engine development, an engine war, and then decree they have to be equal in performance?

When you have your eyes on revenue from tv and marketing, and not on racing, as bernie and the F1 owners have!
Agree with you, F1 is primarily an engineering competition and teams should be allowed to compete, develop, but not with the uneven money distribution that exists.

[mikeyg123]

Did McLaren rubbish Peugoet everytime they could, are they rubbishing Honda now, are McLaren asking for the equalisation of the Hybrid engines?

Why complain they had another supplier sorted in a few months. That's the difference between now and then. No chance of that now. Stuck with an noncompetitive engine? Tough luck.